I welcome Schaeben et al.'s comment on Pan (2001). By arguing that crystal mass is a function of crystal size, they inadvertently suggest that crystal size distribution analysis is completely flawed because it only has one degree of freedom. Unfortunately they did not arrive at the right conclusion, and I am very sorry to say that my reply is anything but “reassuring for those of us who use crystal size distribution theory.”


First a few minor points. Schaeben et al. used circular derivation to get their equation 5: they used their equations 1 and 2 to get their equation...

First Page Preview

First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
You do not currently have access to this article.